The Game

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

892 Esteemed

About The Game

  • Rank
    Comets Star

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Red nation

Recent Profile Visitors

4,999 profile views
  1. MAF wasn’t even the starter for two of his three cups? Hellebuyck had a Hart-worthy season? Saying that Fleury is a better goaltender is just flat out wrong. Edit: and the Cups argument is really strange, would you rather have 60 year old Patrick Roy than Markström since Roy won more Cups?
  2. It’s all good as long as Eriksson isn’t in it.
  3. I can’t believe no one’s said Game Eight against the Bruins. It was a great game in its own right, but the implications felt huge. CoHo’s bar down slap shot behind Tim Thomas was so satisfying, and I truly believed that we’d be able to get back to the finals and win that time.
  4. That I've seen, started following the 'Nucks after they drafted my two favorit players in 1999. Näslund - Morrison - Bertuzzi Sedin - Sedin (C) - Pettersson Horvat - Kesler - Burrows Miller - Linden (A) - Boeser Higgins Edler - Öhlund (A) Hughes - Jovanovski Bieksa - Hamhius Salo Luongo Markström
  5. Why would you turn your country into a Monarchy? It stads against everything a Western Democracy stands for: it places people above the law, and it does so not determined by skill, but by birth. It's a horrible thing and I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to start a Monarchy from scratch? Totally insane. /Swedish person.
  6. Both Daigle and Yakupov had good rookie seasons, so just ‘cause a player’s turned pro doesn’t mean that we know what kind of career he’s going to have. And for every first overall bust there’s like seven guys who lived up to their potential. I don’t see the issue here.
  7. Aren’t they both sure fire franchise center talents? If I’m not mistaken both would have gone number on in the 2017-2019 drafts?
  8. This has to be one of the best comments ever!
  9. I feel like we're saying basically the same thing, but I feel like I want to elaborate. I'm gonna start off by saying that I'm an engineering student, so I'm pretty well versed when it comes to math models. Your way of assessing draft picks works (pretty well) when trying to calculate a general value of a draft pick given its position, but it lacks A LOT when looking at specific examples. For example: if the model concludes that a first overall pick is worth X, say a first line forward for 10 years, something like a Mitch Marner or a Leon Draisaitl. This would be great when looking at the overall value of a first overall pick (I do feel like you're undervaluing a first overall pick a bit when you say that Brock Boeser is performing like one, but nevertheless), and predicting future first overall pick and their values. But if you'd apply this model to a draft in the past, say the 2015 draft you'd run into huge problems. We know that the first overall pick in 2015 was Connor McDavid, a generational talent who at this stage of his career looks like he's well on his way to becoming at least a top 10 player of all time. If you applied your model to this draft it would say that Peter Chiarelli would've had a great draft had he chosen Jack Eichel with the first overall pick (as Eichel is outperforming what a first overall pick has historically done), and that he'd gotten a passing grade had he chosen Marner, as Mitch looks to be about what you can expect from a first overall pick (given this model). I think that you'd have a hard time finding a single fan who would agree that the Oilers would've had a good draft, had they passed on McDavid and chosen either Eichel or Marner in 2015. If you look at the 2012 draft on the other hand, I would argue that the first real impact player picked was Filip Forsberg at #11, and I wouldn't call him a "first overall level talent". The 2012 draft was historically weak and leading in to the draft the consensus was that either Yakupov or Ryan Murray would go first. Saying that the Oilers had a bad draft when they picked Yakupov (who turned out being one of the worst first overall picks of the 21st century) is true, but saying that they should've picked Filip Forsberg is unrealistic, since no GM in the league would have done that given the Oiler's position, and even so, even given that Forsberg is the best player in the entire draft, he's still worse than most first overall picks are, thus the model would tell us that even he was chosen first overall (again, really unlikely since he wasn't considered a first overall talet at the time) whoever picked him would have had a bad draft. My point in this is that when assessing such a small number of drafts as we are when talking about Benning, you have to look at them one by one to get a good idea of how good a job he's done, this being because the sample size is too small and that the expected value of a draft pick oscillates so much from year to year. The thing with mathematical models based on probabilities and stats work great when used with a really large sample size. you can, given enough data tell the difference between 50.01 % and 49.99 %, but given a small sample size, it can be impossible to tell 1/3 from 2/3. Again, what I'm saying is that the model (although sophisticated and based in facts) is not a good tool when trying to do what you're doing: assess single drafts. I genuinely think that you have to look at Benning's drafts one by one and look at the picks that were made around his picks to tell how good a job he's done. And when doing this, I think it's clear to say that he's missed by quiet a wide margin on some of the picks (mainly in the 2014 and 2016 drafts), hit home runs in some (2015 and 2017), and that the 2018 draft is looking really good at the moment. And it is true that all GMs miss in the draft, but people on here go on and on about what a "draft wizard" he is, and I can't help but feel that if you've missed on two first rounders (both picked in the very beginning of their drafts) in a five year span; maybe you can't be considered a draft wizard.
  10. Did you even read my post? What I said was that while Benning certainly has hit on some draft picks (mostly Elias and Brock) he’s missed on some (Jake and Olli). What do you mean when you say that he hasn’t missed on any first round draft pick? Juolevi was picked at number 5 overall three years ago and has yet to play an NHL game, Matthew Tkachuk (34 goals last year) was picked right after him. That’s a miss I my book. And calling Gaudette a “home run pick” seems a bit pre mature, the guy’s scored six career NHL goals. I’m not saying that Benning has done a horrible job, I’m saying that he hasn’t been as good as some people on here try say that he has.
  11. Everyone always brings up what a great scout Benning is but he’s whiffed on two really high draft picks (Jake at 6, Juolevi at 5). Sure Pettersson and Hughes look amazing, but top end draft picks are supposed to turn out into great players. The only players drafted by Benning in the later rounds currently playing for our team are Demko and Gaudette. I don’t feel like he’s this big draft guru that everyone is making him out to be.
  12. Your just a band wagon fan! Petey is the best ever! Only the corrupt Toronto media would tell you otherwise!!!
  13. I remember a thread like this like 10 games into the 2013/14 season. We were off to a great start and everyone was saying that Tortorella was the best ever. I remember someone saying "AV is the winningest coach in franchise history, and Tortorella is better than him so therefore Torts is the best ever."
  14. I know which Ryan had the better looking family